Borgeson Box upgrade, which should I get

I'm going to be doing an entire front end buildup with QA1 parts, new brakes, shocks, and a Borgeson Box.

My 71 Challenger has the small selector shaft, and since I'm swapping it out, should I upgrade to the larger one? I'm going to also get the firm feel roller bearing idler arm. So what do you think?



Ryan

No opinion on the sector shaft but I would recommend that you use Borgesons coupler and not the Mopar style one. I didn't and the hydraulic noise that can be heard inside the car from the box is annoying. I confirmed with Borgeson that this is the problem and they told me this is why they have urethane spacers in their coupler to eliminate the noise.

Go large pitman.

Newer and more cars on the road with it. = longer time before they discontinue it.

I bought the large sector shaft, but sort of wish I had bought the smaller version. There are several lower cost options for a fast pitman arm out there for the small box and only one for the large box [firm feel].

Not a show stopper, but a difference nonetheless.

With the Borgeson box, is it possible, and has anyone done it, to use a long Pitman arm (not "standard length")... of the length of the long "fast ratio" Pitman arm... regardless of large or small sector shaft size?

Just so you know, the FF "roller bearing" idler arm is an assembly that you have to modify ONLY into a MOOG idler arm... FF's instructions say MOOG ONLY.

I've recently installed the roller bearing assembly into a new idler arm... feels very smooth within its rotation... hope to be driving the car this summer... soon.. with it.

But the Borgeson box is already 14:1? , meaning adding a fast ratio arm and we are in the under 12:1? range, and at some point getting almost to fast for anything over mph?
Besides that, interesting point on price/availability.

Strength wise, I can't see enough difference in real world use to matter, IMO.

I find the Borg box to be quite slow and will be trying the fast arms when I tear into the front end for some reason..

I have a 1.5:1 steering quickener that goes between the steering wheel and the box, but the fab work to put it in is not something I want to deal with on a completed car. Swapping arms is much quicker.

I will be intently watching this thread. I am getting ready to pull the trigger on the Borgeson box for my '71 RR. I've heard about the feedback noise, and the reply of using their coupler for the noise is; good to know. I've also heard a couple say that at 60-70MPH, the 14:1 is a little tight and fast. Can anyone confirm or give real world feedback as to how they like their Borg box? I will be installing this on the stock BB K-frame. Thanks.

.

I installed a Borgeson unit into my 62 and used a standard conversion U joint. Aside from needing to do a toe-n-go alignment adjustment, all good. No leaks no issues of note. Seems like a pretty good upgrade. We've see nsome teething issues with these as they came to market, so the best bet may be to have a professional shop do the install to avoid bricking your car for an extended period of time. I know that when I went to install mine I bought all 3 Pitman arms to aid the install and shorten the down time. I ended up using a stock arm since the 62's are single pivot idlers. Once I get the car back down for the next round of upgrades I'll swap the Idler to a double shear roller unit from Firm Feel and the quick ratio arm. the 14.7:1 that the box come with is nice but not as responsive as my Firm Feel Stage 2 box in my 68 with Q/R arms.

I've talked to a few people about a Fast Ratio arm and the Borgeson box, and they said it would be too twitchy at any sort of speed. So I'm going to start out with the stock arms as of right now.

And as for the coupler. I plan on getting this Bergman no-cut adapter.

https://bergmanautocraft.com/product/direct-fit-steering-coupler/

For some comparison, the T/A box with its longer Fast Ratio Pitman arm, as well as the C-body longer ilder arm (aka Fast Ratio idler arm... used for steering radius correction L-R), has a ratio of 12.7:1. I absolutely love it... and I also have a smaller steering wheel 11.5" diameter to further quicken the response. This combination makes the steering superb... its not too fast at all in any manner... street, highway, autocross/road course... it's great! In fact, I wish I could make it a little faster... I've tried a yet smaller steering wheel of 10" diameter... too small.. hands get criss-crossed too easily when making fast L-R-L-R slalom manuevers.. but definitely faster steering yet!

I've never yet driven a Mopar with the Borgenson ps box, although they are supposed to be the same as a late model Jeep Grand Cherokee, if I'm correct, and that steering is OK from my personal experience. The thing I like most about that box is the lighter weight.. taken from the front end.

The Bergman coupler is the only way to go.

I can't wait until I start driving my Challenger ... real soon this summer.. with my FF Stage-3 T/A box... most curious about the firmness, etc. Everyone I know who has a Stage-2 box said they should have gone stiffer.. such as Stage-3.... I'll let you all know of my findings.

Been daily driving with a 1st gen Borgeson box now for some 7 years already on my '73 Dart. (How time flies.)

I'm still very pleased with the handling, steering effort and number of turns. I'm using the stock steering wheel on my car.
I occasionally have the car up around 90mph and it's as predictable as can be.

I have the boregson box, fast ratio arms (with idler bearing upgrade) , firm feel steering sector support kit, with the bergman coupler in my 71 runner (my setup for the past 5 years now) - Driven alot of miles with it on the highway, autox with it - Its not twitchy at all - actually I find it not responsive enough which is why I will be upgrading to a rack and pinion setup this winter - you guys can pm me if you want to buy my setup after i pull it out when the snow starts to fly....

Let me try to keep score here:

Standard OEM PS box is 16:1
" " " " with "C" fast arm is 12.7: 1
" " " " " " " " with 1.5 quickner is 8.3:1 ??
Borg Box is 14.7:1
" " with "C" arm fast arm is approx 11.6: 1 guessing

IMO, no ratio is too fast for autocross, at over 100? on track, too fast of ratio can be tiresome/twitchy in certain cases, on the street, it can be both, this only an opinion

I have the Borgeson box in my Belvedere and it fits and drives very well. I also used the coupler from Bergman which also fit very well however I have had a persistent and annoying hiss when just off center of the box in slight turns or sitting at a red light without the wheel perfectly centered. I talked to Bergman and Borgeson and was told by Borgeson's tech that their coupler has a urethane section in the center to stop hydraulic noise from traveling through the column.

My box was put in about a year ago so not sure what generation it would be considered.

Interesting, I was hoping the fast arms would be enough. I think for my application, street car, they probably would be.

My previous daily driver was a Wrangler with hydro-assist steering, it was remarkably touchy at speed. After a week or two, I didn't notice it and grew to prefer it.

for those wondering my steering from lock to lock is 1.8 turns - Around the city and highway no problem feels like any other car - its the quick turning in autox which feels like manual steering - it can't keep up (its a new saginaw from day one - not a used one) - I played with different bore diamaters on the pump same thing - which is why I want to go with a power steering setup - Part of it may be my car being a bbody with a big old big block up front.

Dangina -- Thanks very much for the input on the 1.8 turns lock-to-lock... that's great!... but if it can't handle quick autocross manuevers... then something is wrong and that would definitely NOT be the way to go with the Borgesnon box.

You're saying that with the longer fast-ratio arms the steering quickens more to become 1.8 lock-to-lock, BUT, with those longer arms it CANNOT keep up with fast action LRLRLR steering response.

So, it makes me wonder, is the Borgenson box acceptable on a pylon autocross ... with the "standard length arms"... in quick plyon LRLRLR manuevers without any slow-down/resistance?

Has anyone else following this thread had experience using the Borgenson box through a pylon autocross... with required fast-response LRLRLR problems? That problem is known with ALL ps pumps of Federal-design ... NOT with the Saginaw design... and further with hi-winding rpms.

Feedback?

I thought that the accepted ratio for the standard Mopar steering box was 15.7 to 1, not 16. I also thought that the Fast Ratio arms reduced that number to an even 12 to 1.

Maybe rounding allowances? But I suspect those differences, in numbers, here in this discussion are limited IMO. Would be nice however to know exactly.

Anyone?

I'd be interested in your set up. Shipping across country should be easy.

Iam curious of this as well - I am unsure as I don't have an stock arms kicking around - also another reason I want to go powersteering is I have some play in the middle like the old ps boxes - not sure if any of you others out there experience the same thing?

I (more than) occasionally enter 'double laned' roundabouts at 'sporty' speeds, which means a fairly quick right-left-right movement, when following the road straight through.
No signs of loss of steering assist.

JS72D -- Firm Feel advertises 12:1. However, I've also read from other sources 12.7:1. I recall reading that the typical fast ratio 2nd gen GMs (Camaros, FBirds, as well as the C'Vettes of that era) were 12.4:1... and I've driven them and their steering was fast... faster than my T/A setup).

If you get the right ones, they're 8:1

Or buy a Go kart and get 1:1

I was just thinking....

If I get the Fast Ratio arm. I would need the C-body idler arm from Moog to do the roller bearing kit from Firm Feel so everything works correctly and there is no binding. I think a 1970 would work.

http://www.firmfeel.com/e_body_mopar_idler_arm_bearing_kit_2.html

I had a good handling '76 Camaro. I had an '86 IROC 12.7 to 1 steering box in it and can say that the steering response was pretty good. I have a Firm Feel stage 3 with FR arms in my '70 Charger. I like it but I'd like to drive my old Camaro and this Charger back to back to see which felt the best to me.

Those 3rd generation Camaros/Fbirds have amazing steering response.. BUT.. they also have a shorter wheelbase (~101").. far shorter than our Mopars. The shorter wheelbase makes for quicker transitions, tighter radius, etc.

Our current late-model Challengers suffer from a longer wheelbase vs the much shorter Camaros and Mustangs.. for handling, turning radius, etc, as well as overweight design.

Mine was a second generation, a 1976 model. I also had a '73 before that.

Keep in mind that these pictures are from the early 90s when the monochromatic look was popular!

Those Camaros were coolest as the IROC was on the coming forefront.... and the IROC race series of events. Those with factory p/steering were pretty good performers in the SCCA Solo II races, although my own T/A Fast-Ratio setup, with the help of a smaller steering wheel, would be just as fast in response to their's. The 2-gen GM's only advantage was a 2" shorter wheelbase (mine at 110", but the 'Cuda e-body was 108"... advantage to the shorter wheelbase' Cuda! On road course, the longer wheelbase would be a little more stable.

Any progress on this topic? I was curious about the steering quickener on a street car with a stage 2-3 box? Should the couplers be pinned through the shafts for more safety or is the screw-in piece on the couplers fine (with some lock-tite)? Would a 2:1 be too much (about 8.4 -1)?

Yes, I have this on my Satellite. I love it.

T/Anks.. and did you also install the longer (required) Idler Arm (1970 C-body length)?

Any interference issues with exhaust header tubes... both sides.. driver and passenger? If yes, what brand/model headers?

Do you have a BB or SB?

These are critical issues.

Here's my story:
https://board.moparts.org/ubbthread...n-bergman-kit-with-pics.html#Post2686096

So I've got to ask this question because I lined up the Box along with some other misc. parts to make this swap on my Diplomat.

The engine is currently out so it's easy to get at everything.

The one thing I've been trying to work through is the use of either the Borgeson coupler, or the Bergman one. However, as I look at the Bergman one I keep on asking myself this question: isn't this just the Mopar fctory unit with the bottom piece having been replaced by the Borgeson 312500 steering coupler welded on?

That 312500 coupler is a '11/16-36 spline x 3/4- smooth' setup.

So provided that I have a welder whom I can trust (and I do, he races on the dirt), why would I even consider buying either Borgeson or Bergman coupler if I already have the 312500 coupler ready to go and it's just a matter of getting it welded on?